I do think these are some good guidelines that are definitely worth at least considering if you're struggling with choice. One other method I've used to great effect is to read books that I see cited at least 3 times in 3 different places. So if I'm interested in or researching a topic and I see a book or work cited (or recommended) by multiple independent sources, I'll add it to my list. It really helps me find a lot of non-fiction/research-based works with generic titles that I may not come across otherwise.
Obviously, YMMV. This can lead to issues (for example, ideological hegemony in a lot of the fields I'm researching in) and it's by no means the only method I use to pick works. But it has been really helpful for me!
I was starting to work on my own project just this week to deal with the exact same issues and use cases. Excited to check this out and see how it evolves!
This could absolutely be my own misunderstanding, but you mention that it's explicitly not an ORM, but reading through the docs, it seems like the collections and querying aspects of this project are just that. It actually seems like most of what this project's scope seems to be is to be used as an ORM (which I personally am fine with). Can you elaborate on that at all?
Hey, Vincent (author of article) here! Indeed it's a fine line, but ORMs give you objects with methods that allow you to modify or further query the database, like User.save() or User.objects.find(). This is for me the distinction, and in Storex you get data objects back, but all the manipulation happens through one object, the StorageManager.
This is still a typically stringed piano, just with felt added to dampen the other strings, I believe. The webpage describes an Una Corda piano built with only one string
Man, I didn't think that at all but now I wish it was! Would love to read some in depth articles about these kinds of social clubs and the societies they create
Not OP: I really like how (especially on the mobile app) it's always pretty easy to see which albums each track is associated with no matter what direction I get to the Artist from. In Spotify, I have issues where from some directions, it just lists all of the songs that I have saved from an artist, ignoring the album information. It also will sometimes end up with the songs in alphabetical order, making it difficult to listen to the album. While there's always a way to end up seeing a view that I want, it usually ends up with me clicking though a bunch of links to get to the Artists default page, and on things like CarPlay, that's not really an option either making it more difficult.
That was one of my main reasons for switching to Rdio when it was out, and while I really liked Rdio for its UI, it definitely had enough bugs/delays in song starting that I ended up moving (reluctantly) back to Spotify until Apple Music was released. Now, with that handled along with cloud uploads of my local media (I buy a lot off of bandcamp), it feels like a much more whole offering. I wish social and discovery features were up to Spotify's levels, but I personally have moved away from those for various reasons anyway, so it's not as much of an issue for me as it is for users who really utilize those features.
Yeah, I have found Apple Music to be better than Spotify for the curation of music libraries.
> it just lists all of the songs that I have saved from an artist, ignoring the album information
AM definitely has Spotify beat here. Click an artist, see their albums, choose an album to listen to. All in one view. It seems so natural ... I wonder if this is because I learned to curate my music on iTunes, and it is just a habit?
But for music discovery, open development practices (this is the biggest reason I switched from AM to Spotify - knowing that no matter what kind of thing I want to hack together, Raspberry Pi connected to BT speaker connected to projector, I would be able connect Spotify to it somehow), and social music experience, I think Spotify has AM beat.
> AM definitely has Spotify beat here. Click an artist, see their albums, choose an album to listen to.
Maybe I am missing something, but it seems like the flow you describe is exactly how it works in Spotify. Here is an artist page with the album list prominently featured: https://i.imgur.com/wNAjoCa.png
There is also no point on the front page that it is paid, and I would assume that because there is no mention of pricing that it would be free. I'd definitely put something very early on stating pricing and that it is not a free program. To tell someone 35% through a lesson that they are expected to pay may be fine for conversion, it's a really scummy practice.
I know this may be a minority opinion among developers, but I'm ok with them trying to make money. And if the optimal way to do that is to ask 35% of the way through, then that's what they should do. I don't view that as a dark practice or bait and switch. I don't think there is an obligation to be super clear that there is a paid version.
It's something the owner should test, and see if it puts people off or if it converts better. Maybe it puts off 10% more people, but 30% more convert? Good on them for finding that out and optimizing accordingly.
We in the dev world expect way too much for free. Not that I complain when I find something for free, but people deserve to be compensated for their work also.
I never argued the effectiveness of misleading business practices towards generating revenue or conversions. I feel that design can be misleading and user-antagonistic while still being the most effective solution for monetization. It is up to the creator/organization to make that decision, and that decision can be both financially effective and amoral/"scummy" at the same time. I cannot make that decision for the creator/organization, but I also feel no need to default to defending user-antagonistic practices just because "they work".
Weird, no statement or anything that I can find, just a banner at the top of the page. As well, they're shutting off service in less than a month during a time in the year when at least many western countries have limited staff/availability due to holidays. While I understand that once they decide they will no longer be operating, they don't have a legitimate business reason to help (former) customers ease through the transition, it really seems like they went out of their way to be as customer-hostile as they could.
EDIT: Looks like an email went out (copied in a comment below) and that they are not shutting down as an organization, just this product. Even more curious as to why they'd offer such a short migration window to former customers. I would, especially in an organization, be truly hesitant to rely on any of their other technologies if this is the pattern being set.
We are writing to let you know that we decided to pursue a new direction in 2019, and will be closing down the Hyper.sh cloud platform on January 15, 2019.
Over three years ago, we set out to create an open secure container-native platform. We believed that containers represented a sea change in how software would be developed, deployed, and maintained.
Along the way, we created one of the first container-native cloud offerings, the Hyper.sh platform, which utilized our open source technology, called runV, which last year was merged with Intel’s Clear Containers project to become Kata Containers. We’re proud of the platform we built, and the influence we have had on the overall container industry. We are even more grateful to you, our customers, who have deployed hundreds of thousands of containers and built out new business on our platform.
The Hyper.sh platform, while trailblazing, is not where Hyper’s future efforts lie. Moving forward, Hyper is focusing all our attention and efforts towards the upstream Kata Containers project and in developing our Enterprise Kata stack for deployment in the major public clouds.
As of today, it is no longer possible to create a new account on Hyper.sh, and on January 15, 2019, the Hyper.sh cloud service will be shut down. Per section 11 of our terms of service, we wanted to provide you time to migrate off the platform and for the next month, our priority is to help your transition to other cloud services. If you need assistance, please feel free to reach out to us via Slack or your account dashboard. On January 15, 2019 any remaining user data and accounts will be deleted from the platform.
Please start now migrating your containers and data volumes off the platform. Directions on how to migrate your container volumes can be followed here. Please note, you will not be charged for either the container or the FIP in performing the migration.
Thank you for your business and support of our platform. It has been a privilege to serve you.
This is somewhat common. They've probably emailed all their customers with more details. One of them can post a screenshot of their email and link it here.
This really feels like a knee-jerk reaction to the article's headline instead of any sort of argument as to why you think it may be wrong or what pieces of the interview you disagree with.
To be fair, most of the arguments (at least that I've seen, could be non-representative) aren't against big C "Censorship" in the way that this comment implies. It's not an argument as to whether or not Oath/Verizon/Tumblr CAN remove the content and be within their right to do so, it's that it's a poor idea from either a business or a community based point of view (often both). While they are able to manage their community in any way they seem fit, it's that the users of the platform are coming out (and I have absolutely zero data to say whether it's a vast majority or vocal minority) to say that they disagree with the decision that is being made. When phrased in the way that you did, you seem to imply the black-and-white view of "Porn is obviously bad, why shouldn't Tumblr remove it" though ignoring most of the discussion and nuanced views that make a discussion like this worth having.
> you seem to imply the black-and-white view of "Porn is obviously bad, why shouldn't Tumblr remove it" though ignoring most of the discussion and nuanced views that make a discussion like this worth having
You've effectively changed what he said. He said something much simpler: there are children that use Tumblr; because there are children that use Tumblr, removing porn from Tumblr should not be controversial.
A "nuanced" reply would assess the risk of exposing children to the fascinations of various alternative communities that do not dabble in child porn. I don't see "Porn is obviously bad", but I do see exposing children to porn is obviously bad.
It's more than a porn ban, though, it's an "adult content" ban. IMHO because Tumblr chose to make the ban broad instead of focusing on commercial pornography, this made the controversy a lot stronger than it needs to be.
As it stands, Tumblr is not just banning someone's stash of hardcore sex videos. It also is banning, say, a casual vacation photo taken on a beach where topless sunbathing is acceptable (due to the explicit ban on female nipples except for a few narrow contexts). On a more "adult" level, it is also banning stuff in between the two categories, like say boudoir photography (which is usually adult in nature, sometimes erotic / titillating, but is usually not explicitly pornographic.)
Even the "any content that depicts sex acts" seems vague. Would something like, say, Rodin's "The Kiss" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kiss_(Rodin_sculpture) -- be flagged? I don't know, it depends on what the auto-algorithms sees as a "sex act" I guess. Certainly if you were an artist that dabbled in any sort of erotic drawing / painting, the vague definition would probably be a worry IMHO.
(Tumblr is already 13+ already. Commercial crass porn is one thing, but I personally don't think there is any problem showing a 13+ year old this Rodin sculpture or a casual beach shot where topless sunbathing is acceptable.)
It is even simpler, he literally just made a “will somebody please think of the children” argument. Which is so that inane it doesn’t even need a serious reply.
As a parent, the idea of exposing my kids to the internet is frightening. There are so many paths by which they can get exposed to stuff they shouldn't be exposed to. I, personally, think that attempts to make more of the internet child friendly are good. The internet as it exists today is like walking down the Main Street of some town, except that people surprise you by randomly jumping out from behind mailboxes and shrubs and engaging in hardcore sex on the sidewalk. It's insane.
If you’re worried about your kids being exposed to that stuff, set up internet filtering in your home. It’s pretty effective these days, and you’ll actually get way closer to the result you want with that approach than with trying to change the internet.
My kids are young, so it's not something we've had to seriously get into yet. Honestly curious, though: how does filtering handle sites like Reddit or YouTube where all requests are via https, which makes the specific content on the page not visible to filtering which takes place at the network connection level?
I understand there are a lot of “nuanced” rationalizations against Tumblr’s decision-and of course it’s great that they’re discussed and cases are made, so that fair minded people rightfully reject them. We live in a free society- Tumblr is not a monopoly- and now a competitor can freely scoop up the obvious niche community that Tumblr is choosing not to support anymore.
Obviously, YMMV. This can lead to issues (for example, ideological hegemony in a lot of the fields I'm researching in) and it's by no means the only method I use to pick works. But it has been really helpful for me!